Breaking

[Daniel Sullivan]

Sure it can be a wasted effort.

Anything can be a wasted effort.

Because other martial arts and artists do not use breaking and get the same, if not better results

Tameshiwari is specific mainly to Japanese and Okinawan arts, as well as arts that are descended from and/or influenced by such arts. Other arts utilize different methods to achieve the results that tameshiwari achieves.

As to whether MA-ists of styles that do not use breaking achieve the same or better results, what sort of results are you referring to? And do you have any actual data to support that statement?

Personally, I'm not a huge fan of tameshiwari. Makiwara is not a part of the classes that I teach or of any that I have participated in in recent years, so breaking is kind of this unrelated thing that has been attached.

Given that demos don't generally net much in the way of new students, I consider breaking at demos to offer a very low return on the time invested in doing it. That demo time is, in my opinion, better spent on other things.

You don't need breaking, ranking, or other so-called things of display, or even "martial arts", to apply this over to a "real world situation"

Of course not. Rank and display of rank are teaching tools and further subdivide competition bracketing in arts that compete.

Martial arts themselves are simply a way of structuring the transmission of knowledge and/or skills. You don't need grades K-12 to teach math, history, or science, but that is how the educational system chose to structure the classes.

The quality of the teacher is unrelated to which structure the school is using, and the structure pretty much divides things into beginning, intermediate, and advanced anyway, regardless of what you call each stage or how many increments you choose to divide the material into.

Bottom line. Breaking is a "feel good, because its cool" thing

Not much of a bottom line. Again, can you support this statement with actual facts or data?

 

[rickster]

Firstly, if you talk to a child psycologist you will find that very rarely, if ever, do bullies go after confident kids. Bullies lack confidence themselves and almost always have other underlying issues, they bully others to try and gain importance and confidence, they will always pick on kids they know they will beat. Breaking, like forms/katas are a great training tool, thats not to say that schools not using these tools have no value. We had a guy start training with us recently from another club who did no breaking. On one of his first nights we were doing spin hook kicks and breaking timber, this guy had a good kick and would constantly hit the timber but couldnt break it. After looking closely we realised his accuracy was lacking, not by much, maybe an inch or two. He told me later that after years of just kicking pads he had never realised his kick was slightly "out". Since doing regular timber breaking he now hits the board dead centre everytime. Surely accuracy is of benefit in fighting.

My wife is an educator, and some time ago, a friend of hers (my wife) is a child psychologist. I used to pick her brain (child psychologist) about school bullies. Way back then; I wanted to use her expertise about bullies when I was teaching at one of my martial art schools/classes.

The situations at school my wife faces nowadays and tells me daily, bullies do go after confident kids. It isn’t the confidence that stands in the way. Simply, a bully will go after anyone smaller than they. She had even told me of a bully beating a child whom had a black belt, as well as other bullies over the course of years, beating other kids whom studied martial arts. Bullies do not lack confidence, they lack social behavior skills.

That said, the school systems nowadays (because of child violence with weapons), school officials have zero tolerance for bullying.

Said student of yours lacking a inch or two of accuracy will not matter in a real confrontation. I can agree that striking a surface can develop accuracy. However, that said, an inanimate, non-alive target, is going to limit this accuracy. Breaking is a limited source. If other people don't need it, then it is not "really" needed. As I had stated, to reiterate; if a teacher realizes there are other methods, breaking is not a necessity.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

We had a guy start training with us recently from another club who did no breaking. On one of his first nights we were doing spin hook kicks and breaking timber, this guy had a good kick and would constantly hit the timber but couldnt break it. After looking closely we realised his accuracy was lacking, not by much, maybe an inch or two. He told me later that after years of just kicking pads he had never realised his kick was slightly "out". Since doing regular timber breaking he now hits the board dead centre everytime. Surely accuracy is of benefit in fighting.

I think that this needs to be qualified; board breaking is actually a specific skill and is not entirely related to striking accuracy.

So far, I have been able to sort out kicking issues in students without the use of board breaking. I think that the best method for developing accuracy of strikes is a combination of focus targets, a Bob, and sparring.

Also, the breaker of the board is dependent in large part on the person holding the board or on the way that the board is positioned in a mechanical holder. Things like height, angle, and whether or not the holder can keep from moving with the force of the kick, thus absorbing shock.

I suspect that Stephen Lopez' performance at the Olympics would be identical if he had never broken a board in his life. Which makes me curious as to whether or not kyukpah is even a part of training for a TKD athlete at his level.

 

[rickster]

Not much of a bottom line. Again, can you support this statement with actual facts or data?

Yes it is.

Because unlike those Asian systems which do it traditionally, for schools abroad, breaking is a "feel good, because its cool" thing

Other schools do not use breaking.

Somewhere I read either Oyama or Funakoshi were not big fans of Tameshiwari.

On another note, Tameshiwari was not look upon as a real test of skill. It was soon realized by higher heads of orgs that people wanted to see this.

Likewise many schools nowadays, it was for demonstration and attention.

 

[rickster]

I think that this needs to be qualified; board breaking is actually a specific skill and is not entirely related to striking accuracy.

So far, I have been able to sort out kicking issues in students without the use of board breaking. I think that the best method for developing accuracy of strikes is a combination of focus targets, a Bob, and sparring.

Also, the breaker of the board is dependent in large part on the person holding the board or on the way that the board is positioned in a mechanical holder. Things like height, angle, and whether or not the holder can keep from moving with the force of the kick, thus absorbing shock.

I suspect that Stephen Lopez' performance at the Olympics would be identical if he had never broken a board in his life. Which makes me curious as to whether or not kyukpah is even a part of training for a TKD athlete at his level.

I like your post except for the part;

"board breaking is actually a specific skill"

 

[rickster]

Kancho Oyama said in his own words; “When considering the Karate boom around the world, I am forced to admit that Tameshiwari has played a large part in making Karate popular, as Tameshiwari generally seems very attractive to people.”

When the Korean War broke out in 1950, a Karate exhibition was held to which many foreign personal of the Armed Forces were invited. They were not at all interested in Kata and Kumite demonstrations but when Tameshiwari was performed, the hall became as quite as still water. They were fascinated by the performances, and afterwards, a thunderous applause arose over the hall.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Yes it is.

Because unlike those Asian systems which do it traditionally, for schools abroad, breaking is a "feel good, because its cool" thing

Other schools do not use breaking.

Somewhere I read either Oyama or Funakoshi were not big fans of Tameshiwari.

On another note, Tameshiwari was not look upon as a real test of skill. It was soon realized by higher heads of orgs that people wanted to see this.

Likewise many schools nowadays, it was for demonstration and attention.

When you refer to schools abroad, are you referring to systems that are unrelated to those systems where tameshiwari is traditionally used or to non Asian schools that do practice those systems?

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

I like your post except for the part;

"board breaking is actually a specific skill"

My point is that board breaking doesn't always tell 'correct' technique, which is the argument that many make for it.

Sure, if you strike correctly, you'll most likely break the board. But you can also break the board if you strike it in the correct place and with the correct amount of force, even if the strike is not executed 'correctly.'

While I do think that breaking has value, I also recognize that it is not the only tool for the job, and the job for which it was originally intended is probably not being done, as I doubt that many schools utilize makiwara training as a regular part of class.

 

[rickster]

My point is that board breaking doesn't always tell 'correct' technique, which is the argument that many make for it.

Sure, if you strike correctly, you'll most likely break the board. But you can also break the board if you strike it in the correct place and with the correct amount of force, even if the strike is not executed 'correctly.'

While I do think that breaking has value, I also recognize that it is not the only tool for the job, and the job for which it was originally intended is probably not being done, as I doubt that many schools utilize makiwara training as a regular part of class.

I share the same view.

Breaking has been as much a misunderstood subject in martial arts same as Chi, Pressure Points, History-Legend, and Ranking, to name a few

The problem with rhetorical conversations in martial arts, is that many keep following others who either do not take the time, do not want to take the time, or not desire to stray off a present course.

In other words, they remain complacent in what they do, and somewhere along the way, when another attempts to point out something in opposition or in correction, they get offensive (or defensive)

Breaking became a tool for certain martial art schools, but it certainly was not in place for some decades ago in comparison to current times.

Breaking in the past was somewhat like a marketing status, (and a few used it to fuel the ego of some hardcore skill or quasi-force example).

Nowadays, with it seemingly a type of increased interest, there are supply sites which sell the proper grade and dimensions of wood, leaving a school to not having to seek out the material along the vast selection found in common lumber yards.

Additionally, these martial art supply sites, started to sell, from the ingenious of an entrepreneur, re-breakable boards, which seem hard to break, and can re-fastened to break again. The drawback with these boards, it tends to subtract the awe and image that real wood can exemplify.

I would like to state, that I really to not have anything against a school which has breaking as a tool. I just wanted it to be understood, that it is not true test of skill per fighting ability

 

[rickster]

When you refer to schools abroad, are you referring to systems that are unrelated to those systems where tameshiwari is traditionally used or to non Asian schools that do practice those systems?

Apologies. I am not quite sure or understand the question.

 

[icemaster2340]

Go on the internet and watch Enter the Dragon by Bruce Lee.

Bruce Lee squares off with tall scar-faced white guy.
White guy throws wooden board in the air and breaks it with his fist.

Bruce Lee: Wooden Boards do not strike back.

I think that's all need to be said. Besides, not sure if you realized this yet, but most of the wooden boards you get from martial arts stores are synthetic: That is to say, they're strips of wood that have been glued together to form a larger board.
Don't believe me? Get the rectangular wooden block, try to break it horizontally. Then try again with another identical block, but this time vertically. The board would only break if its placed in a horizontal manner. So there.

 

[ralphmcpherson]

Go on the internet and watch Enter the Dragon by Bruce Lee.

Bruce Lee squares off with tall scar-faced white guy.
White guy throws wooden board in the air and breaks it with his fist.

Bruce Lee: Wooden Boards do not strike back.

I think that's all need to be said. Besides, not sure if you realized this yet, but most of the wooden boards you get from martial arts stores are synthetic: That is to say, they're strips of wood that have been glued together to form a larger board.
Don't believe me? Get the rectangular wooden block, try to break it horizontally. Then try again with another identical block, but this time vertically. The board would only break if its placed in a horizontal manner. So there.

I suppose there is no need for punching bags, focus mits or speed balls either as they also dont hit back.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Go on the internet and watch Enter the Dragon by Bruce Lee.

No need. I'm old school; I actually own the movie and can watch it without the bother of an internet connection.

Bruce Lee squares off with tall scar-faced white guy.
White guy throws wooden board in the air and breaks it with his fist.

Bruce Lee: Wooden Boards do not strike back.

I think that's all need to be said.

Right! And only a ninja can kill a ninja. Sho Kosugi said so in Revenge of the Ninja... or was it Ninja 3: The Domination? Could have been both.

Oh, apparently, that wasn't all that needed to be said...

Besides, not sure if you realized this yet, but most of the wooden boards you get from martial arts stores are synthetic: That is to say, they're strips of wood that have been glued together to form a larger board.
Don't believe me? Get the rectangular wooden block, try to break it horizontally. Then try again with another identical block, but this time vertically. The board would only break if its placed in a horizontal manner. So there.

That is a laminate board, not a synthetic board. I only make the correction because there are synthetic boards. They make them from plastic with some kind of dovetail joint to keep the two halves together and are graded by color to indicate difficulty of breaking. They're actually harder to break than a regular board because you really do have to hit it in the correct spot to get it to break, which actually makes it a better teaching tool than regular boards.

Also, not all schools order boards from MA suppliers; I know at least four school owners who go to Home Depot and simply have wood cut to the dimensions needed.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Because unlike those Asian systems which do it traditionally, for schools abroad, breaking is a "feel good, because its cool" thing

Other schools do not use breaking.

Somewhere I read either Oyama or Funakoshi were not big fans of Tameshiwari.

On another note, Tameshiwari was not look upon as a real test of skill. It was soon realized by higher heads of orgs that people wanted to see this.

Likewise many schools nowadays, it was for demonstration and attention.

When you refer to schools abroad, are you referring to systems that are unrelated to those systems where tameshiwari is traditionally used or to non Asian schools that do practice those systems?

Apologies. I am not quite sure or understand the question.

Regarding the bolded part of your statement above, are you referring to 'schools abroad' that teach traditional systems? For example, a white guy in Wisconsin running a traditional karate dojo.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Additionally, these martial art supply sites, started to sell, from the ingenious of an entrepreneur, re-breakable boards, which seem hard to break, and can re-fastened to break again. The drawback with these boards, it tends to subtract the awe and image that real wood can exemplify.

Personally, I think that breaking in class, including tests, should be done with rebreakable boards. Demos are all about awe and image, so if you're going to do breaking demos, wood is a better choice.

 

[SahBumNimRush]

Also, not all schools order boards from MA suppliers; I know at least four school owners who go to Home Depot and simply have wood cut to the dimensions needed.

We get our boards from a local lumber yard. White pine in 1" and 2" thicknesses. I cut them at 6" wide for young children and 10 1/2 for everyone else. It is the same with pavers, we get them from a local masonry supply company. I've seen the "demo" boards that MA supply companies sell. They make a nice sound when they break, and they break REALLY easily. So for demos I think they're okay, but for true breaking practice, they fall very short IMO.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

We get our boards from a local lumber yard. White pine in 1" and 2" thicknesses. I cut them at 6" wide for young children and 10 1/2 for everyone else. It is the same with pavers, we get them from a local masonry supply company. I've seen the "demo" boards that MA supply companies sell. They make a nice sound when they break, and they break REALLY easily. So for demos I think they're okay, but for true breaking practice, they fall very short IMO.

I think that for speed breaking, MA supply company boards are ideal. But speed breaking is a whole specialty all its own, where the ability to rapidly and consistently repeat a technique and to have the stamina to do so for sustained periods of time are more important than maximum power generation.

For traditional breaking, even for demos, I prefer to see actual wood, as you use, or roofing tiles and the like to pre-cut breaking boards. At my old school, when GM Kim broke a big chunk of slate at a demo, being held up by four people each of whom had people behind them keeping them in place, it was a much bigger crowd pleaser than any of the precut board breaking that the kids were doing.

 

[pgsmith]

I just wanted it to be understood, that it is not true test of skill per fighting ability

I can't recall anyone stating that it was a 'true test of skill per fighting ability'. Nothing that you can do in a dojo is a 'true test of skill per fighting ability'. Everything that is done in a dojo is simply another training tool to attempt to instill the abilities that a particular school is espousing. The only true test of fighting ability is to have to fight for your life against someone trying to kill you. Everything else is a compromise of that situation. We train and we practice and we spar in hopes of having the ability to survive a true test of our fighting skills if it ever happens. However, the vast majority of martial artists will never be called upon to exercise the training that they've been doing in a life or death situation.

The only truly useless martial arts related activity, in my opinion, is that habit of many martial artists of denigrating other schools and other methods because they are not the same as what they are doing. You can go to any martial arts forum and find dozens of threads by experienced martial artists denigrating everything from kata to sparring to kicking to throwing. Just because a particular school does not do something does not mean that it is useless and without benefit within another schools training regimen.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Kancho Oyama said in his own words; “When considering the Karate boom around the world, I am forced to admit that Tameshiwari has played a large part in making Karate popular, as Tameshiwari generally seems very attractive to people.”

When the Korean War broke out in 1950, a Karate exhibition was held to which many foreign personal of the Armed Forces were invited. They were not at all interested in Kata and Kumite demonstrations but when Tameshiwari was performed, the hall became as quite as still water. They were fascinated by the performances, and afterwards, a thunderous applause arose over the hall.

Kata is hard for the uninformed to grasp. Kumite is interesting enough, but its fighting, and anyone can learn to fight. But everyone, and I mean everyone, can appreciate tameshiwari. Everyone knows how much their hand hurts when it hits hard objects by accident. So when they see someone transcend normal human limitations, it gets their attention. Regardless of what you or I think of breaking, that is how over 90% (my off the cuff estimate) of non-MA-ists see it.

Everyone finds the idea of transcending mortal limitations appealing. If they didn't kids wouldn't run around with red bath towels converted into capes pretending to be Superman, nobody would buy toy light sabers and pretend to be jedi, and nobody would have bought Chemtoy's Spiderman Webmaker back in the seventies (I saved up my allowance to do so).

We have an inborn desire to transcend our limitations. Tameshiwari allows us to endulge in that fantasy for a brief moment. After we understand it, we then may enjoy the reality that our limitations weren't quite as limiting as we thought they were.

 

[rickster]

I suppose there is no need for punching bags, focus mits or speed balls either as they also dont hit back.

Yeah. But these are not wasted each time they are struck upon.

In other words, after one strike, you dont need to go out and purchase more punching bags, focus mits or speed balls

And no one stands around applauding from awe-struck when someone strikes punching bags, focus mits or speed balls